Good news ... now let's let all transfers play immediately. Or force coaches and ADs to wait a year as well.

What about the teachers. Or perhaps anyone that changes their job. make them all sit out a year.

What you are proposing is to eliminate student-athletes entirely. Lets therefore eliminate school affiliation entirely and just create professional leagues where the players get paid. It will become like overseas where teams are supported by cities and corporations. They would have to be because they certainly wouldn't be able to support those teams on the money made at the gate.

Hey, I have a simple solution. Lets just eliminate scholarships and then students can transfer and play when and where ever they desire. It's scholarships that are responsible for those tricky student commitment rules.

_________________No one one is ever as good as their best game, nor as bad as their worst.

Hey, I have a simple solution. Lets just eliminate scholarships and then students can transfer and play when and where ever they desire. It's scholarships that are responsible for those tricky student commitment rules.

I agree with this. Most of the vast labyrinth of NCAA rules having to do with recruiting, jobs, transfers, alumni and earned income are the result of the fact that colleges give tons of free scholarship money to a discriminatory and entitled class called student-athletes.

Why should Lola the jump shooter get a bunch of free money from Orwell State University when Lola the singer, Lola the skier, Lola the whitewater slalom canoeist, Lola the bagpipe player, Lola the chess player and Lola the break dancer don't. Eliminate all these arbitrary and discriminatory scholarships, return all that money to the general scholarship fund, and distribute it to real students -- who seriously study important academic subjects such as philosophy, history, rhetoric, classics, physics, mathematics and engineering -- and who are in financial need.

The serious students who want to engage in sports, dancing, singing or chess can and will do so on an extracurricular basis, especially all those who think they can become professionals in those fields. And, of course, all those students can earn outside money however they want and switch schools whenever they want.

Take the sports money -- all the money -- out of institutions of higher learning. The Ivy League didn't have athletic scholarships when I was there over 50 years ago and still doesn't. Yet it gets good athletes, has interesting sports teams, and even produces some top pro athletes. And the Ivy League would get a lot more top athletes if Orwell State wasn't buying athletes with a pig trough of discriminatory scholarship dough.

The Ivy League may not give athletic scholarships, but my daughter was recruited pretty heavily from 4 Ivy’s, and they made it very clear that our financial contribution would be extremely small, if not non-existent. They use foundation grants and academic scholarships to cover the costs, even if the athlete has a lower GPA then plenty of regular students that they are denying admittance to.

Glenn, you silly goose....you know it's because Lola the jump shooter is inherently more valuable than all of the other Lolas combined.

Actually, I quite agree with you and willtalk.

I'd think we all agree that equalizing (?) the scholarship field for female athletes to match what was already happening on the mens' side of things (thankyoutitleIX) is a positive but, overall, the money spent on recruiting athletes is clearly one of those American excesses we've grown inured to.

And, for the record, I'd never want to live in a world where Bagpiping was a scholarship thing. Ever.

Now, paying students to play sports that generate hundreds of millions in revenue -- that makes sense too. (You don't pay women's tennis players, or male golfers; just the players that generate income, directly or indirectly, for the school.)